Thanks to MS3DALE, I was able to get a hold of the FE6 parts numbers from the 1LE. I know some of you are eager to get your hands on them so I'm going to share. I also marked each one to show what packages also use those parts so no one orders something they already have!

Maybe make a note that they are ZL1 parts so someone doesn't order them accidently thinking they are 1LE? Or do the ZL1 and 1LE share the same rear parts, and the 1LE just has different front parts?

So ARE the front sway bar and end link numbers for the 1LE?

The front sway bar is the 1LE sway bar. The rear parts are shared with the ZL1. The only 1LE specific parts are the front sway bar, struts and shocks. I labeled the list to show what models share the same parts.

The front sway bar is the 1LE sway bar. The rear parts are shared with the ZL1. The only 1LE specific parts are the front sway bar, struts and shocks. I labeled the list to show what models share the same parts.

Ahhhh, I did not know they they shared parts, I was under the impression that all the 1LE stuff was different. Thanks that clears things up a bit... Guess I can order some stuff now Are the 2010 & 2012+ front sway bar end links the same?

Ahhhh, I did not know they they shared parts, I was under the impression that all the 1LE stuff was different. Thanks that clears things up a bit... Guess I can order some stuff now Are the 2010 & 2012+ front sway bar end links the same?

Any chance for a complete 1LE diff part number yet?

I didn't ask for it but I can. The current SS diff is $1821.43 though. prepare to pay a bit more for a complete 1LE diff. XD The 2012 front endlinks are much thicker and use larger 12mm studs instead of the 10mm used on the 2010 links.

You are right. They never mentioned about springs being different. I don't know what I was thinking. I guess I assumed springs are different because of dampers are different and ZL1 shock mounts lead me to think of ZL1 springs. Now that I thought about it, ZL1 shock mounts are needed for mono-tube rear dampers as they are longer compare to twin-tube in SS so they have to be mounted higher like ZL1. I am a little disappointed since I was hoping for lower ride height and higher rate of ZL1 springs but thanks for clearing it up.

You are right. They never mentioned about springs being different. I don't know what I was thinking. I guess I assumed springs are different because of dampers are different and ZL1 shock mounts lead me to think of ZL1 springs. Now that I thought about it, ZL1 shock mounts are needed for mono-tube rear dampers as they are longer compare to twin-tube in SS so they have to be mounted higher like ZL1. I am a little disappointed since I was hoping for lower ride height and higher rate of ZL1 springs but thanks for clearing it up.

Indeed. You can however run the ZL1 Springs with the 1LE dampers. There's currently a 2LT running ZL1 Coil springs with zero issues.

Indeed. You can however run the ZL1 Springs with the 1LE dampers. There's currently a 2LT running ZL1 Coil springs with zero issues.

You can doesn't mean you should. Springs and dampers are matched pairs. You can run FE5 springs with FE2 dampers but they are not optimal. SS springs are really too soft for motorsport. How many sets of dampers does GM need for one set of springs? FE3, FE4, and now FE6?

You can doesn't mean you should. Springs and dampers are matched pairs. You can run FE5 springs with FE2 dampers but they are not optimal. SS springs are really too soft for motorsport. How many sets of dampers does GM need for one set of springs? FE3, FE4, and now FE6?

Except the ZL1 front spring rates are almost identical to the SS front spring rates. And The rears are much stiffer to allow for hard launches and better control. Springs manage the weight of the car, a stiffer spring rate will allow you to handle better. Yes finding the right spring rate + dampening level is more optimal. Ford runs GT spring rates on V6 dampeners with the Performance package from the factory. With your logic no one should lower there cars with spring with much high rates than from the factory. There are aftermarket companies that use the same springs and rates for both V6 and V8 cars.

Except the ZL1 front spring rates are almost identical to the SS front spring rates. And The rears are much stiffer to allow for hard launches and better control. Springs manage the weight of the car, a stiffer spring rate will allow you to handle better. Yes finding the right spring rate + dampening level is more optimal. Ford runs GT spring rates on V6 dampeners with the Performance package from the factory. With your logic no one should lower there cars with spring with much high rates than from the factory. There are aftermarket companies that use the same springs and rates for both V6 and V8 cars.

ZL1 front spring rate IS identical to SS. They are both 27 N/mm. The rears are different, SS is 66 N/mm and ZL1 is 70 N/mm. Higher spring rate doesn't mean better control. Control comes from matching dampers to the springs in compression, rebound, and travel. What higher spring rate will give you is less body movement (body roll, brake dive, and squat under acceleration). You will think the same damper can be used for SS and ZL1 springs but it isn't optimal because the travel is different. ZL1 suspension travel is lower compare to SS but it can get away with it because MRC can dial in more compression when it detects a big hit. SS structs are not as smart. If you compare v6 to SS springs, you will see that lower 25 N/mm spring rate of v6 is compensated by longer travel of 96 mm. 25 N/mm x 96 mm = 2400 Newton unit of force to bottom out. SS springs are 27 N/mm x 84 mm = 2268 N.

I don't know about Mustangs so I am not going to comment on them but I will say something about aftermarket lowering springs. It is MY OPINION that most lower the car's handling capacity. Lowering springs have too little travel, too low of spring rate, and factory dampers cannot control them well. It is basically a cosmestics modification at the expense of handling. I am not saying you cannot lower your car with higher rate springs. All I am saying is that you gotta match those springs to proper dampers. Pedders supercar coilovers have 8kg/mm springs up front. This is twice the factory spring rate but it rides and handles very well. Compare that H&R super sport lowering springs that has very close to factory rates and you'll quickly see the importance of matching springs to dampers.

Prices are cheaper than I thought they would be. Thanks for posting this info.

They're pretty good prices, better than what I would have thought. Though the rear shock mount pricing is odd. They are the correct numbers but one is twice the price of the other. It makes me wonder if its differnt, or and error in pricing.

ZL1 front spring rate IS identical to SS. They are both 27 N/mm. The rears are different, SS is 66 N/mm and ZL1 is 70 N/mm. Higher spring rate doesn't mean better control. Control comes from matching dampers to the springs in compression, rebound, and travel. What higher spring rate will give you is less body movement (body roll, brake dive, and squat under acceleration). You will think the same damper can be used for SS and ZL1 springs but it isn't optimal because the travel is different. ZL1 suspension travel is lower compare to SS but it can get away with it because MRC can dial in more compression when it detects a big hit. SS structs are not as smart. If you compare v6 to SS springs, you will see that lower 25 N/mm spring rate of v6 is compensated by longer travel of 96 mm. 25 N/mm x 96 mm = 2400 Newton unit of force to bottom out. SS springs are 27 N/mm x 84 mm = 2268 N.

I don't know about Mustangs so I am not going to comment on them but I will say something about aftermarket lowering springs. It is MY OPINION that most lower the car's handling capacity. Lowering springs have too little travel, too low of spring rate, and factory dampers cannot control them well. It is basically a cosmestics modification at the expense of handling. I am not saying you cannot lower your car with higher rate springs. All I am saying is that you gotta match those springs to proper dampers. Pedders supercar coilovers have 8kg/mm springs up front. This is twice the factory spring rate but it rides and handles very well. Compare that H&R super sport lowering springs that has very close to factory rates and you'll quickly see the importance of matching springs to dampers.

So the mag ride let's them get away with running the same rates in front and near the same in back with a shorter spring. I personally wouldn't lower my car but I had assumed that most manufacturers increased rates more than slightly over stock to compensate for the lower height.

So it appears that the 1LE is following the "big bar/soft spring" approach relative to the SS by increasing only the bar stiffnesses. Even BB/SS tweaking affects the strut/shock valving, which we don't know anything about anyway.

Sleepy - most of the Mustang lowering springs range between about 25% and 75% stiffer than OE, and that's probably true generally. For the amounts typically lowered, that's not enough stiffer to hold the frequency of bump stop contact down to OE levels. But it is too much stiffer than OE for the OE dampers to properly control for best grip. What stiffer springs with OE damping does do is move the level of "critical damping" down toward "best ride", which may explain why there aren't very many complaints about lowering not fixed by trimming the bump stops.

Geometrically, lowering springs give something up that effectively "steals" part of the benefit that the increased rate is supposed to be providing, assuming that what you're primarily after with your new springs in the first place is more spring rate. Wanna bet that most purchasers of "lowering springs" don't think past the amount lowered?

So it appears that the 1LE is following the "big bar/soft spring" approach relative to the SS by increasing only the bar stiffnesses. Even BB/SS tweaking affects the strut/shock valving, which we don't know anything about anyway.

Sleepy - most of the Mustang lowering springs range between about 25% and 75% stiffer than OE, and that's probably true generally. For the amounts typically lowered, that's not enough stiffer to hold the frequency of bump stop contact down to OE levels. But it is too much stiffer than OE for the OE dampers to properly control for best grip. What stiffer springs with OE damping does do is move the level of "critical damping" down toward "best ride", which may explain why there aren't very many complaints about lowering not fixed by trimming the bump stops.

Geometrically, lowering springs give something up that effectively "steals" part of the benefit that the increased rate is supposed to be providing, assuming that what you're primarily after with your new springs in the first place is more spring rate. Wanna bet that most purchasers of "lowering springs" don't think past the amount lowered?

Norm

Norm, maybe we should start calling them "performance springs" so that lowering amount will not be the only thing that matters. I think Mustang guys are lucky. They have choices like Steeda Competition and Koni Yellows. Camaro guys have Eibach Pro-Kit and KYB GR-2 . Big bar/soft spring is great for body roll and ride but it doesn't do anything for dive and squat. Suspension geometry didn't change so anti-dive, anti-lift, and anti-squat remain the same. Also, big bar take away some independent from independent suspension. I can't wait to see more reviews on this car. I think this whole sub 3 mins VIR time is mostly the tires if it is even achievable.

Actually, things like geometric roll centers and anti effects all vary with ride height. It's not that the curves for any of those things plotted against ride height have changed, just that you're operating in different regions of those curves once you lower the car. Or raise it up, for that matter.

As an example, it is entirely possible with some suspension arrangements for the anti-squat % to drop slightly over the first inch of rear suspension compression (squat), before turning around and increasing with still further squat. Even stranger curve shapes are possible, but at least the odd variations in the middle are relatively minor.

One rather important consideration I left out ↑↑↑ is camber gain. With a strut suspension, the lower you go without getting into correcting the geometry, the slower your camber goes negative to compensate for roll as the suspension is compressed still further (consider what the outside suspensions are doing while cornering). With struts up front and either a multi-link IRS or just about any stick axle suspension arrangement, this becomes an understeer effect.